Literature DB >> 20181779

Bayesian credible intervals for binomial proportions in a single patient trial.

Jacob J Oleson1.   

Abstract

Practitioners are often asking if the treatment successfully improved performance. Many times this question is directed towards the outcome of a single individual. In this article, we develop a method to assess the improvement of a single individual who is administered a test of percent correct at pre-treatment and post-treatment. A Bayesian approach is taken where the number correct is modelled as a binomial random variable and the percent correct is set to a beta prior distribution. The first model assumes percent correct at pre-test is equal to the percent correct at post-test and the posterior predictive distribution is used to evaluate the change in the number correct. We subsequently model the proportions correct at pre-test and post-test as unequal. The second model then assumes independent proportions and the third assumes correlated beta distributions for the two proportions. 95% credible intervals are calculated for the various methods for number of correct at post-test given a particular level at pre-test. An example using data from a cochlear implant clinical trial is presented where clinicians recorded percent correct in a consonant-nucleus-consonant test.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20181779      PMCID: PMC3307549          DOI: 10.1177/0962280209349008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res        ISSN: 0962-2802            Impact factor:   3.021


  15 in total

1.  Single patient (n-of-1) trials with binary treatment preference.

Authors:  P J Schluter; R S Ware
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2005-09-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Acoustic plus electric speech processing: preliminary results of a multicenter clinical trial of the Iowa/Nucleus Hybrid implant.

Authors:  Bruce J Gantz; Christopher Turner; Kate E Gfeller
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2006-10-06       Impact factor: 1.854

3.  Critical difference table for word recognition testing derived using computer simulation.

Authors:  Edward Carney; Robert S Schlauch
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.297

4.  Improved confidence intervals for the difference between binomial proportions based on paired data.

Authors:  R G Newcombe
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1998-11-30       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Equivalence test and confidence interval for the difference in proportions for the paired-sample design.

Authors:  T Tango
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1998-04-30       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Speech-discrimination scores modeled as a binomial variable.

Authors:  A R Thornton; M J Raffin
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1978-09

7.  Hybrid 10 clinical trial: preliminary results.

Authors:  Bruce J Gantz; Marlan R Hansen; Christopher W Turner; Jacob J Oleson; Lina A Reiss; Aaron J Parkinson
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2009-04-22       Impact factor: 1.854

8.  N-of-1 trials of expensive biological therapies: a third way?

Authors:  Richard L Kravitz; Naihua Duan; Richard H White
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2008-05-26

9.  Randomized clinical trials in single patients during a 2-year period.

Authors:  E B Larson; A J Ellsworth; J Oas
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1993-12-08       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Combining acoustic and electrical hearing.

Authors:  Bruce J Gantz; Christopher W Turner
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.325

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.